Originally posted by Raven99 Originally posted by Corto Looking forward to a new way of PvP. However, good PvP for me includes the usage of "terrain" features in tactics. Example: high ground gives the opportunity to look farther, climbing slopes slows down movement of troops, hiding in forests or in the dark gives an opportunity for ambushing and flanking movements by friendly regiments, terrain can be used by scouts to spy on the enemy positions and his army-constitution, etc etc... Now I read this in the faq: Q: Will WAR have the players' names over their heads? A: Yes, although you will be able to control the display on your own client.
So I hope the tags are only displayed for friendy PC's. Otherwise you might as well lock the opposing armies in a square room and let them fight it out as the opportunity to remain hidden or use terrain is unexistant. I was also surprised to read that WAR will include levelling (max level=40, 4 tiers of 10 levels). This is so un-warhammer-like. In the RPG only some professions could increase hitpoints and then only max 2 (assassin 3 if I remember correctly). I fear that this will reduce the PvP to a stats-game instead of a skill/tactics-based game. Does anyone know where I can find more info about terrain modelling and levelling-system?
This game will be nothing like the table version. its going to be one big grief fest with no tactic, or anything that even comes close to emulating the greatness of the Warhammer game.
Raven
There are many mechanism in place to prevent griefing in this game. If you don't want to PvP but still want to advance your character then just stay in the PvE areas of the game. They are there for those who don't want to PvP 100% of the time.
Of course this is a PvP centric MMO and the biggest rewards will usually be in PvP end game portions for the most part. If you want a PvE centric title I'd suggest you stay clear of this game.
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
"I had a choas wizard general that had 10 str and 10 attacks doing 1d3 wounds per attack... Watching him smack into a squad and 1 shotting a champion then taking out 9 other models breaking the unit single handedly was classic Warhammer... As far as tactics... 75% of the kiddies today playing Warhammer have no clue about tactics... It is all about the special characters now and the 99% fodder you put around them for color."
Reading that made me laugh looks like it was quite a bit as much about the special character for you as it is for todays kiddies.
"I had a choas wizard general that had 10 str and 10 attacks doing 1d3 wounds per attack... Watching him smack into a squad and 1 shotting a champion then taking out 9 other models breaking the unit single handedly was classic Warhammer... As far as tactics... 75% of the kiddies today playing Warhammer have no clue about tactics... It is all about the special characters now and the 99% fodder you put around them for color." Reading that made me laugh looks like it was quite a bit as much about the special character for you as it is for todays kiddies.
Yes and no... The warlords in old school warhammer were nasty no doubt but they were equal... You could only spend so much on your warlords, the items they could have were generic, A bad played warlord could die easily. If my warlord that I mentioned had walked up to that unit without support on the next turn 2 units would be on him and my beast of a warlord would be dead in 1 turn.
Today with the special characters... the lizard men throne toad comes to mind... They CAN charge head first into an army with no support and never be touched. They have special abilities that no other character on the board can have. Some of which are WAY over powered. Most players could spend hours throwing their army at these special characters and unless lucky will not even kill them.
The game is vastly different, but that does not mean old school was not nasty blood thirsty throw down fights. BTW... that magic item on my wizard... we eventually agreed to stop using it... Both sides would have it and eventually it came down to which general could kill the other one off first... even when one did die the other was so banged up he pretty much spent time in the back doing nothing.
Classic WH you could have an arms race that got so nasty players agreed to back it off... Today it is special character FoM and what overpowered crap he can use to decimate your army.
-Atziluth-
- Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
I'm sorry to say this but you just discribed a FPS, Using Tactis is a must, Terrain 100% of you game play is knowing the lay out and where to get the best shots from, seeing peoples names, only when you get the kill does this come up, Flanking, goes back to Tactics and Squad based play, your not looking for an MMO your looking for an FPS, I recommend BF2, run with a good Clan and you will do nothing but smile.
Well, you are maybe partly right there, as far as tactics are concerned at least. However, I do like RPG'ing as well and I do not see why both can't be combined. I was hoping WAR would make an attempt at it.
The warhammer p&p rpg had one of the best rules systems and did not include levelling. An ideal and unique concept which really might make an MMORPG revolutionary.
As it stands now, a level 10 char cannot beat a level 40. So at least he should have the option to travel offroads, being able to hide in forests to avoid the level 40 enemies camping the main road or such...
With my OP i didn't mean to start a discussion about the 'cartoonish' look of the gfx (everybody his own preference, no need/use to argue), merely the functionality of terrain grafix and tagging for PvP.
I just hope it wont merely be a question of bashing at the enemy with as many maxed out characters as possible. Of course strength of numbers and army-organisation are important in any battle, but using (terrain &) other features should make it possible for an understrength army to defeat a more numerous enemy.
As someone in the thread pointed out, It seems that they are just trying to even the numbers and levels of chars on both sides and making the fights instanced. Fingers crossed that the game has some nice mechanisms to make the out-of-instance-PvP worthwhile.
I look forward to seeing how this game combines elements of the warhammer rpg with the warhammer wargame. I hope they succeed in making it a unique PvP-RPG (not neglecting the PvE-part).
Completely without adding anything, this topic once more shows how little people know about Warhammer, its Universe, the way it looks, the way it's deliberately created ( Posh people wasn't an invention by Paul Barnett, they are _based_ on them ) and especially about their own reasons why they refuse to play it.
Completely without adding anything, this topic once more shows how little people know about Warhammer, its Universe, the way it looks, the way it's deliberately created ( Posh people wasn't an invention by Paul Barnett, they are _based_ on them )
I'm sorry for my topic lol. I thought this was a WAR-related forum and I could ask questions about the game here.
Originally posted by daelnor I honestly haven't followed this game very closely, but I would put money down that if mythic is developing it, it will be a solid pvp game. However, with EA in the mix...I dunno. If EA sits, back, shuts the hell up and just hands the money over it should be a good game. If they interfere, then the potential of the game spirals downwards rapidly.D.
Looking forward to a new way of PvP. However, good PvP for me includes the usage of "terrain" features in tactics. Example: high ground gives the opportunity to look farther, climbing slopes slows down movement of troops, hiding in forests or in the dark gives an opportunity for ambushing and flanking movements by friendly regiments, terrain can be used by scouts to spy on the enemy positions and his army-constitution, etc etc... Now I read this in the faq: Q: Will WAR have the players' names over their heads?
A: Yes, although you will be able to control the display on your own client.
So I hope the tags are only displayed for friendy PC's. Otherwise you might as well lock the opposing armies in a square room and let them fight it out as the opportunity to remain hidden or use terrain is unexistant. I was also surprised to read that WAR will include levelling (max level=40, 4 tiers of 10 levels). This is so un-warhammer-like. In the RPG only some professions could increase hitpoints and then only max 2 (assassin 3 if I remember correctly). I fear that this will reduce the PvP to a stats-game instead of a skill/tactics-based game. Does anyone know where I can find more info about terrain modelling and levelling-system?
My only comment is about your issue with names.
WAR is about WAR, this isn't a game where your going to be hiding behind trees, stealth killing people running around... You'll be too busy being in a battle to the death, and you hiding behind some tree/edge is just going to make your team suck.
The number one most wanted character type is that of an assassin, people want the stealth, people want the suprise, the ability to get and out picking people off, before a mob auto targets you . Terrain comes into effect there and names above heads dont help.
This game will be nothing like the table version. its going to be one big grief fest with no tactic, or anything that even comes close to emulating the greatness of the Warhammer game. Raven
I agree it will not be like table top. How can it be really unless you are making an MMORTS. They have done a very good job of putting a warhammer skin on an MMO and using traditional types of characters from the table top game... As to the grief fest there will be some griefing I am sure... to say it will be any more rampant then other games is incorrect. I have no issue with griefing in WAR... it brings out the true nature of table top... having 20 ironbreakers smash into 30 or 40 goblins watching them break and taking half of the goblin/orc army with them is classic warhammer. If you played the old school rules and not the watered down kiddie rules now when you could make your own magic weapons based on points... I had a choas wizard general that had 10 str and 10 attacks doing 1d3 wounds per attack... Watching him smack into a squad and 1 shotting a champion then taking out 9 other models breaking the unit single handedly was classic Warhammer... As far as tactics... 75% of the kiddies today playing Warhammer have no clue about tactics... It is all about the special characters now and the 99% fodder you put around them for color.
I have a big problem with griefing, and I think the RvR environment will encourage this. If its the true nature of the table top then its going to be in the game. It looks like its going to be Mob A vs Mob B all pressing the shortcut for auto target, or all on a voice chat saying "lets kill him" - "who?" - "him! - can't you see the name above his head!". Its grief and therefore a grind if the repetitive nature is too do it all over and over again. Granted its probably fun for the first few goes. With the 75% of kiddies playing as you said having no clue about tactics (lets face it - this is th target audience) and mobs rushing at each other, (fun to watch im sure) will lose the tactics and similarites of the table top. Battles like table top just wont happen 90% of the time like they usually play out.
Originally posted by Fsuparker Kalmarth... wow man that is kind of a stupid thing to say if you ask me. Yes you do need to use tactics in FPS, and yes BF2 is a good game and all, but you should have to use tactics in an MMO PVP, it is stupid to go with the flow of all of these other games, where it comes down to what do u have equiped over how good you are as a player, and how well u can sneak up on someone Terrain should be a major factor, of course along with your ability to use it to your advantage
IMO, I thought daoc pvp was very terrain/range dependant.
Ever been hit by a scout that was hiding in tall grass from full range and FROM BEHIND?
Hopefully we can count on Mythic to do some of the same things in WAR.
Looking forward to a new way of PvP. However, good PvP for me includes the usage of "terrain" features in tactics. Example: high ground gives the opportunity to look farther, climbing slopes slows down movement of troops, hiding in forests or in the dark gives an opportunity for ambushing and flanking movements by friendly regiments, terrain can be used by scouts to spy on the enemy positions and his army-constitution, etc etc... Now I read this in the faq: Q: Will WAR have the players' names over their heads?
A: Yes, although you will be able to control the display on your own client.
So I hope the tags are only displayed for friendy PC's. Otherwise you might as well lock the opposing armies in a square room and let them fight it out as the opportunity to remain hidden or use terrain is unexistant. I was also surprised to read that WAR will include levelling (max level=40, 4 tiers of 10 levels). This is so un-warhammer-like. In the RPG only some professions could increase hitpoints and then only max 2 (assassin 3 if I remember correctly). I fear that this will reduce the PvP to a stats-game instead of a skill/tactics-based game. Does anyone know where I can find more info about terrain modelling and levelling-system?
This game will be nothing like the table version. its going to be one big grief fest with no tactic, or anything that even comes close to emulating the greatness of the Warhammer game.
Raven
If this were modeled after the Warhammer tabletop game, this would be a PC RTS. However, it is a PvP-centric MMORPG. I'm not sure why there is confusion about this. The devs have been nothing but honest about their intentions for the game from day one.
It's WoW with more emphasis on PVP. Seriously.. WoW came from a strategy game too. The only thing the same really is the lore.. even then that's like non-existant. As far as Warhammer Online, the graphics blow. I quit cartoon land years ago. New day of age. Get rid of those god awful graphics. Nuff said. Lame game.
If you knew anything about games jackass, you'd realize they went that route with the graphics so that when 500 people are fighting another 500 people it wouldn't be a lag fest and your video card wouldn't be on fire. Learn about computers and gaming before you make your half ass comments.
If you would noticed/learn WaR is one of VERY FEW games that don't care about graphics.... meaning its cartoons not because they are worried about the mass amount of people plaything but its cheaper for them. More particles and more enties = more B/W which equals more money to their ISP/Server host. And Second of all I stand with Kyle here, War should have gotten with the time and made better graphics. Its a remake of WoW and wont last more then a year.... or dear I said something about about War on WarFans.com I mean Mmorpg.com. Duel 7600 gt 256mb Geforced can handle well over 300 people to 400 people all casting with no lag on Vanguard and that's Vanguard.... You said You need to Learn about computers and games.... err I think you need to learn more.
WaR took the cheap way and went low graphics applying to about 20% of the gaming community. The rest 80% have already upgrade and are waiting for URT3 based engine games... I think you need to learn a little more about computers and games before calling someone a jackass.. And for your noobish ways I explain.... URT3 = Unreal tournament 3
This is clearly one of the 99.0001% of the time that you dont know what you are talking about, as stated in your very own sig
I have dual core, 4 gig of Ram, and an 8800. I lag in PvP in Vanguard when too many players get on screen.. and by too many I mean about 20, not 300.
Grymm MMO addict in recovery! EQ,SWG preCU,L2,EQ2,GW,CoH/CoV,V:SOH, Aion,AoC,TR,WAR,EVE,BP,RIFT,WoW and others... no more!
It's WoW with more emphasis on PVP. Seriously.. WoW came from a strategy game too. The only thing the same really is the lore.. even then that's like non-existant. As far as Warhammer Online, the graphics blow. I quit cartoon land years ago. New day of age. Get rid of those god awful graphics. Nuff said. Lame game.
I have a big problem with griefing, and I think the RvR environment will encourage this. If its the true nature of the table top then its going to be in the game. It looks like its going to be Mob A vs Mob B all pressing the shortcut for auto target, or all on a voice chat saying "lets kill him" - "who?" - "him! - can't you see the name above his head!". Its grief and therefore a grind if the repetitive nature is too do it all over and over again. Granted its probably fun for the first few goes. With the 75% of kiddies playing as you said having no clue about tactics (lets face it - this is th target audience) and mobs rushing at each other, (fun to watch im sure) will lose the tactics and similarites of the table top. Battles like table top just wont happen 90% of the time like they usually play out.
There are two things that caught my attention from the Devs...
1) Player collisions: An organized guild will be able to have the meat shields form a line with the caster/ranged in the back plugging away. Formations will be hard to keep... but with vent and a core group of people I hope it will make a noticeable difference.
2) No stealth classes: This was huge for me. Stealth was the worst thought of idea in MMO gaming. Invisible classes invite ganking plain and simple.
There will be ganking in any PvP game... I think the Devs have taken steps to at least make it a little more obvious and thus easier to avoid.
-Atziluth-
- Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
It's WoW with more emphasis on PVP. Seriously.. WoW came from a strategy game too. The only thing the same really is the lore.. even then that's like non-existant. As far as Warhammer Online, the graphics blow. I quit cartoon land years ago. New day of age. Get rid of those god awful graphics. Nuff said. Lame game.
wtf u care? u dont even pvp or u dont even know how lol. U expect to play with max graphic setting with 500 ppl on ur screen?
What is your F problem? So he doesnt like the graphic's so what? I dont like them either but i am still going to play because it looks like a fun game that is PvP based not PvE based. How do you know he doesnt PvP? I am willing bet 1 v 1 pvp and he will win cause you seem like an idoit. 500 ppl? I expect to play with Max graphics in every game I play reguardless of how many people are on my screen. That is bad design if the game cannot handle 500 people in one spot.
Originally posted by TdogSkal What is your F problem? So he doesnt like the graphic's so what? I dont like them either but i am still going to play because it looks like a fun game that is PvP based not PvE based. How do you know he doesnt PvP? I am willing bet 1 v 1 pvp and he will win cause you seem like an idoit. 500 ppl? I expect to play with Max graphics in every game I play reguardless of how many people are on my screen. That is bad design if the game cannot handle 500 people in one spot.
Just to bring up a point... It is not usually bad code that causes issues... it is hardware limitation. Many games are now designed for hardware potential that will be coming out... which means on release your gear probably will not be able to handle max settings with hundreds of toons on the screen.
-Atziluth-
- Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
As someone in the thread pointed out, It seems that they are just trying to even the numbers and levels of chars on both sides and making the fights instanced. Fingers crossed that the game has some nice mechanisms to make the out-of-instance-PvP worthwhile.
In many of the videos with the developers they have stated that all types of RvR will be important in the game with Open World RvR being the most important.
As someone in the thread pointed out, It seems that they are just trying to even the numbers and levels of chars on both sides and making the fights instanced. Fingers crossed that the game has some nice mechanisms to make the out-of-instance-PvP worthwhile.
In many of the videos with the developers they have stated that all types of RvR will be important in the game with Open World RvR being the most important.
That video clearly states that Scenarios, not open-world RvR/PvP, will be the most important form of PvP. It's not disputable. I suggest you watch it again.
Looking forward to a new way of PvP. However, good PvP for me includes the usage of "terrain" features in tactics. Example: high ground gives the opportunity to look farther, climbing slopes slows down movement of troops, hiding in forests or in the dark gives an opportunity for ambushing and flanking movements by friendly regiments, terrain can be used by scouts to spy on the enemy positions and his army-constitution, etc etc... Now I read this in the faq: Q: Will WAR have the players' names over their heads?
A: Yes, although you will be able to control the display on your own client.
So I hope the tags are only displayed for friendy PC's. Otherwise you might as well lock the opposing armies in a square room and let them fight it out as the opportunity to remain hidden or use terrain is unexistant. I was also surprised to read that WAR will include levelling (max level=40, 4 tiers of 10 levels). This is so un-warhammer-like. In the RPG only some professions could increase hitpoints and then only max 2 (assassin 3 if I remember correctly). I fear that this will reduce the PvP to a stats-game instead of a skill/tactics-based game. Does anyone know where I can find more info about terrain modelling and levelling-system?
What is sounds like to me is that you'll be more into something like Tabula Rasa. It is "basically" like a really enhanced version of an FPS that does take advantage of what you just said. Now I also hope that there will be some awesome things like that in WAR, but for an RPG type game it's kind of iffy. Unless they made a MMO out of a turn based strategy like say Shining Force. (Dreams about a shining force MMO witch will probably be ruined by Sega)
Siehst du mich Erkennst du mich Ganz tief in meinem Herz ist noch ein Platz f?r dich Ich suche dich Ich sehne mich nach dem was ich geliebt hab doch ich find es nicht
It's WoW with more emphasis on PVP. Seriously.. WoW came from a strategy game too. The only thing the same really is the lore.. even then that's like non-existant. As far as Warhammer Online, the graphics blow. I quit cartoon land years ago. New day of age. Get rid of those god awful graphics. Nuff said. Lame game.
If you knew anything about games jackass, you'd realize they went that route with the graphics so that when 500 people are fighting another 500 people it wouldn't be a lag fest and your video card wouldn't be on fire. Learn about computers and gaming before you make your half ass comments.
If you would noticed/learn WaR is one of VERY FEW games that don't care about graphics.... meaning its cartoons not because they are worried about the mass amount of people plaything but its cheaper for them. More particles and more enties = more B/W which equals more money to their ISP/Server host. And Second of all I stand with Kyle here, War should have gotten with the time and made better graphics. Its a remake of WoW and wont last more then a year.... or dear I said something about about War on WarFans.com I mean Mmorpg.com. Duel 7600 gt 256mb Geforced can handle well over 300 people to 400 people all casting with no lag on Vanguard and that's Vanguard.... You said You need to Learn about computers and games.... err I think you need to learn more.
WaR took the cheap way and went low graphics applying to about 20% of the gaming community. The rest 80% have already upgrade and are waiting for URT3 based engine games... I think you need to learn a little more about computers and games before calling someone a jackass.. And for your noobish ways I explain.... URT3 = Unreal tournament 3
wtf are u talking about? when was the last time u see more than 20 ppl at 1 spot from Vanguard? U are so full of sh1t .
Only thing i worry about WAR's pvp is will it get boring after a few months? i mean ur attacking the same city over and over. . . your only goal is to attack the ONE main city and to climb in progression to attack that city. Imho it sounds repetative , if someone knows anything about other PvP related things, please tell me, because atm; this game is starting to look boring . I mean its fun to attack a city with 1000 people and all but is there anything else? like can all factions take over any cities or is it just set to 1? because if you can take over any city hehe theres gonna be alot more stratagy then i thought
That video clearly states that Scenarios, not open-world RvR/PvP, will be the most important form of PvP. It's not disputable. I suggest you watch it again.
You're twisting the statement around to make it mean what you want. It says Scenarios count more toward victory points than any other form of RvR. Great - that doesn't reflect how the victory points earned per kill will impact the comparable value of small skirmishes versus large persistent world battles, and; that has nothing to do with my earned experience or personal Renown points (the thing I get my personal rewards for PvP from), which come primarily from player kills. Where will we make bank - fighting in a small instanced skirmish against something between six and thirty-six enemy players, or defending a persistent world objectives as part of a large force arrayed against 200 enemy players?
Comments
Raven
There are many mechanism in place to prevent griefing in this game. If you don't want to PvP but still want to advance your character then just stay in the PvE areas of the game. They are there for those who don't want to PvP 100% of the time.
Of course this is a PvP centric MMO and the biggest rewards will usually be in PvP end game portions for the most part. If you want a PvE centric title I'd suggest you stay clear of this game.
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
Game(s) I Am Currently Playing:
GW2 (+LoL and BF3)
"I had a choas wizard general that had 10 str and 10 attacks doing 1d3 wounds per attack... Watching him smack into a squad and 1 shotting a champion then taking out 9 other models breaking the unit single handedly was classic Warhammer... As far as tactics... 75% of the kiddies today playing Warhammer have no clue about tactics... It is all about the special characters now and the 99% fodder you put around them for color."
Reading that made me laugh
looks like it was quite a bit as much about the special character for you as it is for todays kiddies.
Yes and no... The warlords in old school warhammer were nasty no doubt but they were equal... You could only spend so much on your warlords, the items they could have were generic, A bad played warlord could die easily. If my warlord that I mentioned had walked up to that unit without support on the next turn 2 units would be on him and my beast of a warlord would be dead in 1 turn.
Today with the special characters... the lizard men throne toad comes to mind... They CAN charge head first into an army with no support and never be touched. They have special abilities that no other character on the board can have. Some of which are WAY over powered. Most players could spend hours throwing their army at these special characters and unless lucky will not even kill them.
The game is vastly different, but that does not mean old school was not nasty blood thirsty throw down fights. BTW... that magic item on my wizard... we eventually agreed to stop using it... Both sides would have it and eventually it came down to which general could kill the other one off first... even when one did die the other was so banged up he pretty much spent time in the back doing nothing.
Classic WH you could have an arms race that got so nasty players agreed to back it off... Today it is special character FoM and what overpowered crap he can use to decimate your army.
-Atziluth-
- Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
I'm sorry to say this but you just discribed a FPS, Using Tactis is a must, Terrain 100% of you game play is knowing the lay out and where to get the best shots from, seeing peoples names, only when you get the kill does this come up, Flanking, goes back to Tactics and Squad based play, your not looking for an MMO your looking for an FPS, I recommend BF2, run with a good Clan and you will do nothing but smile.
Well, you are maybe partly right there, as far as tactics are concerned at least. However, I do like RPG'ing as well and I do not see why both can't be combined. I was hoping WAR would make an attempt at it.The warhammer p&p rpg had one of the best rules systems and did not include levelling. An ideal and unique concept which really might make an MMORPG revolutionary.
As it stands now, a level 10 char cannot beat a level 40. So at least he should have the option to travel offroads, being able to hide in forests to avoid the level 40 enemies camping the main road or such...
Aha that would already be something.
Just to clarify:
With my OP i didn't mean to start a discussion about the 'cartoonish' look of the gfx (everybody his own preference, no need/use to argue), merely the functionality of terrain grafix and tagging for PvP.
I just hope it wont merely be a question of bashing at the enemy with as many maxed out characters as possible. Of course strength of numbers and army-organisation are important in any battle, but using (terrain &) other features should make it possible for an understrength army to defeat a more numerous enemy.
As someone in the thread pointed out, It seems that they are just trying to even the numbers and levels of chars on both sides and making the fights instanced. Fingers crossed that the game has some nice mechanisms to make the out-of-instance-PvP worthwhile.
I look forward to seeing how this game combines elements of the warhammer rpg with the warhammer wargame. I hope they succeed in making it a unique PvP-RPG (not neglecting the PvE-part).
I will certainly be trying this game.
Completely without adding anything, this topic once more shows how little people know about Warhammer, its Universe, the way it looks, the way it's deliberately created ( Posh people wasn't an invention by Paul Barnett, they are _based_ on them ) and especially about their own reasons why they refuse to play it.
I'm sorry for my topic lol. I thought this was a WAR-related forum and I could ask questions about the game here.
Also, if you have nothing to add, why post?
Havent heard that said before......
WAR is about WAR, this isn't a game where your going to be hiding behind trees, stealth killing people running around... You'll be too busy being in a battle to the death, and you hiding behind some tree/edge is just going to make your team suck.
The number one most wanted character type is that of an assassin, people want the stealth, people want the suprise, the ability to get and out picking people off, before a mob auto targets you . Terrain comes into effect there and names above heads dont help.
I agree it will not be like table top. How can it be really unless you are making an MMORTS. They have done a very good job of putting a warhammer skin on an MMO and using traditional types of characters from the table top game... As to the grief fest there will be some griefing I am sure... to say it will be any more rampant then other games is incorrect. I have no issue with griefing in WAR... it brings out the true nature of table top... having 20 ironbreakers smash into 30 or 40 goblins watching them break and taking half of the goblin/orc army with them is classic warhammer. If you played the old school rules and not the watered down kiddie rules now when you could make your own magic weapons based on points... I had a choas wizard general that had 10 str and 10 attacks doing 1d3 wounds per attack... Watching him smack into a squad and 1 shotting a champion then taking out 9 other models breaking the unit single handedly was classic Warhammer... As far as tactics... 75% of the kiddies today playing Warhammer have no clue about tactics... It is all about the special characters now and the 99% fodder you put around them for color.
I have a big problem with griefing, and I think the RvR environment will encourage this. If its the true nature of the table top then its going to be in the game. It looks like its going to be Mob A vs Mob B all pressing the shortcut for auto target, or all on a voice chat saying "lets kill him" - "who?" - "him! - can't you see the name above his head!". Its grief and therefore a grind if the repetitive nature is too do it all over and over again. Granted its probably fun for the first few goes. With the 75% of kiddies playing as you said having no clue about tactics (lets face it - this is th target audience) and mobs rushing at each other, (fun to watch im sure) will lose the tactics and similarites of the table top. Battles like table top just wont happen 90% of the time like they usually play out.
IMO, I thought daoc pvp was very terrain/range dependant.
Ever been hit by a scout that was hiding in tall grass from full range and FROM BEHIND?
Hopefully we can count on Mythic to do some of the same things in WAR.
Raven
If this were modeled after the Warhammer tabletop game, this would be a PC RTS. However, it is a PvP-centric MMORPG. I'm not sure why there is confusion about this. The devs have been nothing but honest about their intentions for the game from day one.
If you knew anything about games jackass, you'd realize they went that route with the graphics so that when 500 people are fighting another 500 people it wouldn't be a lag fest and your video card wouldn't be on fire. Learn about computers and gaming before you make your half ass comments.
If you would noticed/learn WaR is one of VERY FEW games that don't care about graphics.... meaning its cartoons not because they are worried about the mass amount of people plaything but its cheaper for them. More particles and more enties = more B/W which equals more money to their ISP/Server host. And Second of all I stand with Kyle here, War should have gotten with the time and made better graphics. Its a remake of WoW and wont last more then a year.... or dear I said something about about War on WarFans.com I mean Mmorpg.com. Duel 7600 gt 256mb Geforced can handle well over 300 people to 400 people all casting with no lag on Vanguard and that's Vanguard.... You said You need to Learn about computers and games.... err I think you need to learn more.
WaR took the cheap way and went low graphics applying to about 20% of the gaming community. The rest 80% have already upgrade and are waiting for URT3 based engine games... I think you need to learn a little more about computers and games before calling someone a jackass.. And for your noobish ways I explain.... URT3 = Unreal tournament 3
This is clearly one of the 99.0001% of the time that you dont know what you are talking about, as stated in your very own sig
I have dual core, 4 gig of Ram, and an 8800. I lag in PvP in Vanguard when too many players get on screen.. and by too many I mean about 20, not 300.
Grymm
MMO addict in recovery!
EQ,SWG preCU,L2,EQ2,GW,CoH/CoV,V:SOH,
Aion,AoC,TR,WAR,EVE,BP,RIFT,WoW and others... no more!
This can't be exactly like the tt game, purely because if all the orcs where like Grimgor, it wouldnt be fun. Its exactly like misfit said:
Its an MMO set in the warhammer universe. Its not meant to be a 100% port of the game to an online form.
Hey misfit, Remember Entrari? I used to level wth you in EQ2. :P Check the guild listing for a swashy, I might still be in it.
I find it kinda funny, I find it kinda sad, The dreams in which I'm dieing are the best I've ever had.
img227.imageshack.us/img227/7281/warvswow6te.jpg
That should clear things up a bit. Enjoy!
1) Player collisions: An organized guild will be able to have the meat shields form a line with the caster/ranged in the back plugging away. Formations will be hard to keep... but with vent and a core group of people I hope it will make a noticeable difference.
2) No stealth classes: This was huge for me. Stealth was the worst thought of idea in MMO gaming. Invisible classes invite ganking plain and simple.
There will be ganking in any PvP game... I think the Devs have taken steps to at least make it a little more obvious and thus easier to avoid.
-Atziluth-
- Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
wtf u care? u dont even pvp or u dont even know how lol. U expect to play with max graphic setting with 500 ppl on ur screen?
What is your F problem? So he doesnt like the graphic's so what? I dont like them either but i am still going to play because it looks like a fun game that is PvP based not PvE based. How do you know he doesnt PvP? I am willing bet 1 v 1 pvp and he will win cause you seem like an idoit. 500 ppl? I expect to play with Max graphics in every game I play reguardless of how many people are on my screen. That is bad design if the game cannot handle 500 people in one spot.
Sooner or Later
Just to bring up a point... It is not usually bad code that causes issues... it is hardware limitation. Many games are now designed for hardware potential that will be coming out... which means on release your gear probably will not be able to handle max settings with hundreds of toons on the screen.
-Atziluth-
- Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
Watch this video, it will explain it better.
www.warhammeronline.com/english/media/podcast/files/pp_TypesofRvR_bitrate.html
"There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer."
Watch this video, it will explain it better.
www.warhammeronline.com/english/media/podcast/files/pp_TypesofRvR_bitrate.html
That video clearly states that Scenarios, not open-world RvR/PvP, will be the most important form of PvP. It's not disputable. I suggest you watch it again.
What is sounds like to me is that you'll be more into something like Tabula Rasa. It is "basically" like a really enhanced version of an FPS that does take advantage of what you just said. Now I also hope that there will be some awesome things like that in WAR, but for an RPG type game it's kind of iffy. Unless they made a MMO out of a turn based strategy like say Shining Force. (Dreams about a shining force MMO witch will probably be ruined by Sega)
Siehst du mich
Erkennst du mich
Ganz tief in meinem Herz
ist noch ein Platz f?r dich
Ich suche dich
Ich sehne mich
nach dem was ich geliebt hab
doch ich find es nicht
If you knew anything about games jackass, you'd realize they went that route with the graphics so that when 500 people are fighting another 500 people it wouldn't be a lag fest and your video card wouldn't be on fire. Learn about computers and gaming before you make your half ass comments.
If you would noticed/learn WaR is one of VERY FEW games that don't care about graphics.... meaning its cartoons not because they are worried about the mass amount of people plaything but its cheaper for them. More particles and more enties = more B/W which equals more money to their ISP/Server host. And Second of all I stand with Kyle here, War should have gotten with the time and made better graphics. Its a remake of WoW and wont last more then a year.... or dear I said something about about War on WarFans.com I mean Mmorpg.com. Duel 7600 gt 256mb Geforced can handle well over 300 people to 400 people all casting with no lag on Vanguard and that's Vanguard.... You said You need to Learn about computers and games.... err I think you need to learn more.
WaR took the cheap way and went low graphics applying to about 20% of the gaming community. The rest 80% have already upgrade and are waiting for URT3 based engine games... I think you need to learn a little more about computers and games before calling someone a jackass.. And for your noobish ways I explain.... URT3 = Unreal tournament 3
wtf are u talking about? when was the last time u see more than 20 ppl at 1 spot from Vanguard? U are so full of sh1t .Only thing i worry about WAR's pvp is will it get boring after a few months? i mean ur attacking the same city over and over. . . your only goal is to attack the ONE main city and to climb in progression to attack that city. Imho it sounds repetative
, if someone knows anything about other PvP related things, please tell me, because atm; this game is starting to look boring 
. I mean its fun to attack a city with 1000 people and all but is there anything else? like can all factions take over any cities 
or is it just set to 1? because if you can take over any city 
hehe theres gonna be alot more stratagy then i thought 
You're twisting the statement around to make it mean what you want. It says Scenarios count more toward victory points than any other form of RvR. Great - that doesn't reflect how the victory points earned per kill will impact the comparable value of small skirmishes versus large persistent world battles, and; that has nothing to do with my earned experience or personal Renown points (the thing I get my personal rewards for PvP from), which come primarily from player kills. Where will we make bank - fighting in a small instanced skirmish against something between six and thirty-six enemy players, or defending a persistent world objectives as part of a large force arrayed against 200 enemy players?